In this period of my life I happen to frequent, against my will, the oncology ward of a hospital of my place. I often accompany a relative of mine, who's seriously ill (one who does not practice the Aimed Solar Returns, but that's another story). The little pavilion, although architecturally modern and functional, drips pain from every wall, and it is paved with suffering and suffering again in every single square centimetre of its surface.
In such a place, as well as in any other environment of our planet, men and women of different brains, races, breed, tempers and sensitiveness cohabitate.

The behaviour of some of them, especially the doctors' and the nurses', clashes considerably with this lazaretto of the modern times: they always wear a broad grin; they would slap the patients on the back (even if many of them are terminal patients, living their last weeks of life); they would tell them funny stories; they would assure them that there is nothing to be concerned, and that everything goes on well. The question is: are they optimists?

The answer is: no, they are morons.
There's no need to be a Sigmund Freud to understand that the patients are widely aware of their own state of health, and that they consider such exhibitions as stupid and void attempts of implausible third-rate actors of an oncological pavilion.

Georges Bernanos wrote: “Optimism is a false hope for the sake of the cowards and the imbeciles (La liberté pour quoi faire)”.
I know other doctors, less brilliant and less jesters, who often stare at the patient and say: “You're stove up - you've got a huge layer of tar on your lungs. Your life is seriously in danger - but if you listen to me, if you quit smoking and if you follow my medical advice, you may escape.”. This is the kind of doctor that the superficiality and the ignorance that dominate the world nowadays, in every layer of our society, would simply label as a “pessimist”, while luckily they are people who think and act after thinking, saving several human lives.

Well, also among astrologers there are optimists and pessimists.
For example, in the field of Solar Returns or of Aimed Solar Returns somebody's knowledge is comparable to mine knowledge of Chinese alphabet, nonetheless they ask: “How can all that nonsense of Ciro Discepolo be true, for example what he claims of a Mars in the 1st House?”. Some other, even more ignorant I this field the former, but having the same rank of optimisms-idiocy, answers: “Don't pay heed to him! Mars in the first house makes hair grow on men's chest and makes harden women's breast. One of my good female friends married under such a celestial position [How does this touch on my case? It is far from being clear]”.

The 'scrapbook' of my dearest memories, obtained from suggesting to thousands of people a suitable place for an active relocation of their SR far from home, contains a sequel of happy events, such as: people who couldn't find the right partner and who are now happily married; others who were facing professional hindrances and are now satisfied; others who eventually had a child after years of unsuccessful attempts, and so on.
When I expose a situation to a consulting person, I don't care if what I am about to say would be judged “optimistic” or “pessimistic”, for I focus on offering him/her a solution, facts, as an attempt to help this person in front of me get out of trouble.

Now, if by means of my “pessimism” I help people live better, I ask: “Is it better to be optimist or pessimist?”.

And I also ask: “Can a pessimist make hundred of people travel every year to spend their birthday in another continent?”. And - are you sure that such an individual is really a pessimist? Or should we change something in the English dictionary? Or perhaps can this be explained with the fact that a growing number of standardized people, homogenized in crowds, open their mouth and produce sounds without having switched their brain on?
If so, I prefer to think like Jacques Bainville (Lectures): “Optimism is the faith in revolutions [even in Solar Revolutions]”.